I think you're basically ignoring my point - that increasing numbers of targeted assassinations are not really a gun control issue (today's was seemingly a single shot, so things being discussed in this thread seem pretty not related), but a sign of major societal problems that need to be addressed.

Your response seems very off topic in focusing on "mass shootings" which are at best an ill-defined marketing term created to lump family annihilation suicides with more public mass casualty events like the pulse nightclub shooting in order to launder dubious policies.

But my whole original comment said nothing about mass shootings to begin with.

Strong gun regulations have a couple of orders of magnitude impact on one type of gun violence, but you think that’s irrelevant and off-topic to whether strong gun regulations would have an impact on another form of gun violence?

How could that make any sense?

> I think you're basically ignoring my point

You didn’t clarify that by “everything that’s happening” as the preface to your suggestion that gun control is pointless you specifically meant “political assassination and no other gun deaths”. It’s reasonable that someone would see you say that gun regulation wouldn’t have an effect on gun deaths and think that you were talking about gun deaths generally.

It would actually be bizarre for a reader to read “everything that’s happening” and think “the person that wrote this is referring to the first shooting at a school today and specifically excluding the second shooting at a school today”